In one memo from Jan. 17, 1983, Roberts summarized a report on what he termed states' efforts to "address perceived problems of gender discrimination.'' Roberts told his boss, White House Counsel Fred Fielding, that "many of the reported proposals and efforts are themselves highly objectionable.''

Roberts criticized a California law to guarantee equal pay for men and women performing comparable though different jobs as "a staggeringly pernicious law codifying the anti-capitalist notion of 'comparable worth' (as opposed to market-value) pay scales.''

Roberts said: "I think it is imperative that the report make clear (as it presently does not)'' that it's an inventory of state efforts "and that proposals appearing in it are not necessarily supported by the administration.''

Okay, let's rerun that one more time for those in the cheap seats. Roberts is arguing that the market should be the sole wage determinant for men and women, and that it does so based on "market value," i.e., worth. If men are paid more, they are therefore "worth" more, and to suggest differently would be "anti-capitalist" (which, during the Reagan era still dominated by the cold war, was the all-purpose commie flame-toss that "why do they hate America" is today).

Many women do opt for careers as homemakers and take on the most important job there is, raising children. And they are all too often cast into poverty as a result of that choice. When they try to return to the marketplace, hey, they may do they same job as a man, you know, the equal work part, but they certainly can't ask for the same salary, can they, because they they don't have the years of experience?

See Jane open her purse. See Jane haul out her wallet. See Jane promise a hundred bucks to any pro-choice candidate who runs against any Democratic Senator that votes to confirm this bastard.